Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:54, 16 April 2018

You changed my correctons for the F-22

You changed my correction about the F-22. It's an aircraft designed and built by Boeing Coproration NOT Lockheed Martin. Here is the aircraft in Boeing's official website: http://www.boeing.com/history/products/f-22-raptor.page Lockheed martin is currently producing the F-35. There are comments in the page that are not correct and they are biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgios3377 (talk • contribs) 12:44, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Nevermind. I dont know what I was thinking. Its LM indeed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgios3377 (talk • contribs) 12:57, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

You are engaged in edit battles over your need to gate-keep all Clinton-related articles

I'm taking this to the board, where complaints are made.maslowsneeds🌈 14:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Please do, maslowsneeds. I will grab the popcorn and watch you embarrass yourself. -- Scjessey (talk) 14:44, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what you two have in mind but this seems like a very bad idea. The US election is about 36 hours from being done. Patience. - Wikidemon (talk) 14:46, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I have nothing in mind. This is entirely a maslowsneeds thing concerning religious affiliations in infoboxes (which you also weighed in on). -- Scjessey (talk) 14:49, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

That you are so brazen and flippant is material to how you treat other Misplaced Pages editors with disrespect and contempt. Is this how you treat people IRL ? Please go defend yourself here. You need to account for your intimidation and harassment to the community. --maslowsneeds🌈 14:50, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

LOL. -- Scjessey (talk) 14:51, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Fine page!

That's a very attractive talkpage you've got here. Minimalist yet striking. darwinbish ☠ 23:34, 11 November 2016 (UTC).

There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlackAmerican (talk • contribs)

LOL! -- Scjessey (talk) 10:55, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

@Maslowsneeds: Huh? -- Scjessey (talk) 15:21, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I received a notification yesterday that you posted something that referenced me. I came to your page to respond, but then the section I read and was responding to was deleted. I don't know how this comment saved, if the section I was reading and that I thought I was responding to got deleted. Please ignore. I'm sorry, I did not mean to post an unwarranted comment like this. maslowsneeds🌈 15:49, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

@Maslowsneeds: Weird. As far as I know, we haven't "crossed paths" since the beginning of November. Anyway, no harm done - we're cool :-) -- Scjessey (talk) 15:58, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I got a notification yesterday in My Alerts, which could have been an echo, and I followed the notification here. I swear I read something that promted my comment. I would not come here for no reason, so perhaps what I saw was an echo/something in my cache from weeks ago. Thanks for understanding. maslowsneeds🌈 16:51, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Do not be resistant to consensus

RE: Donald Trump

No. The only one that makes any sense is politician, businessman, television personality and President-elect of the United States. "Businessman" covers the real estate developer aspect. -- Scjessey (talk) 14:00, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

This is evidence of inflexibility, battleground behavior, and being prone to edit warring. Consensus is achieved either falsely (by wearing out other editors and chasing them away) or by being able to live with more than only your opinion and choice. Scjessey writing that "the only one" that makes any sense is the wrong type of behavior. Even though I do not believe that "politician" is appropriate, there are certain combinations that would be more sensible than others. I will explain at the end of this (talk page) section and not insert it in the middle. Usernamen1 (talk) 04:50, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Your writing also means that politician, businessman, and President-elect of the United States makes no sense. Too inflexible. Believe me, Sad! (Last part is parody). Usernamen1 (talk) 04:53, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

@Usernamen1: What on earth are you talking about? I get that you disagree with my view, but it is just as valid as yours. Given the fact I have been a Wikipedian for 11 years and have over 24 thousand edits under my belt, whereas you have less than 250 edits in the 4 months you have been with the project, I would argue that I have a better grasp than you do of what is and is not appropriate. -- Scjessey (talk) 13:32, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your statemment that "I get that you disagree with my view, but it is just as valid as yours." Previously you had written that the only view is yours (top quote). Usernamen1 (talk) 21:47, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

@Usernamen1: If you have nothing useful to say, I'd really rather you didn't bother commenting. -- Scjessey (talk) 22:00, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Picture revert

Dear Scjessey, with this edit you reverted my revert of someone who had removed this longstanding picture. Per 1RR/DS rules, please self-revert and take the discussion to the talk page. — JFG 13:11, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

December 2016

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Misplaced Pages again, as you did at Barack Obama, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. William Avery (talk) 13:34, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

This was not me. I think my account was compromised. I have changed my password. -- Scjessey (talk) 13:43, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

HJ Mitchell I see you have blocked me because of a compromised account. I have changed my password. Do I need to do anything else to get my editing privileges back? -- Scjessey (talk) 13:49, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Change your email. Marvellous Spider-Man 13:52, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Since we don't know whether the account is still compromised, and must assume it is at this time, some convincing off-site verification will be necessary, preferably using a pre-established non-compromised identity. -- zzuuzz 13:55, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

@Marvellous Spider-Man: The email account associated with my Misplaced Pages account? I'm not sure what purpose that would serve. My original Misplaced Pages password (now changed) was not used for anything else. It would be awesome if two-factor authentication was a fully rolled out feature on Misplaced Pages. -- Scjessey (talk) 13:56, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

@Zzuuzz: Erm... okay. Any suggestions? -- Scjessey (talk) 13:58, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

• Note - I have a meeting I need to go to for about four hours, so I will be away from Misplaced Pages. If anyone has any good ideas about how I can get unblocked in the meantime, I would greatly appreciate it. -- Scjessey (talk) 14:01, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about this, Simon, but you'll need to find some way of proving that you're the real Scjessey. Are there admins or well-known editors you know in real life or you've contacted off-wiki that you can contact to verify who you are? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:02, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

I suggest a selfie photo taken holding today's newspaper. That could be compared to the photo on his user page.- MrX 14:10, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

I'd be satisfied with that. Thanks, MrX. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:24, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

@HJ Mitchell: I don't get a newspaper, but I can take a selfie with this talk page in the picture (functionally equivalent) and then upload it to my personal website. If that doesn't prove I'm me, I don't know what does. -- Scjessey (talk) 18:20, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

@HJ Mitchell: Okay, I've done it. Please don't laugh when you click on this proof it is me. You may need to copy/paste the URL directly into your browser because of the way my server is setup. -- Scjessey (talk) 18:27, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

@MrX: I've had to do a modified version of your idea. Not getting any responses though. Any chance you could mention my plight to a passing admin for me? -- Scjessey (talk) 18:35, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

I get a "forbidden" error there. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:38, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

You should be able to just go to the link directly in your browser. -- Scjessey (talk) 18:42, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Works with a copy/paste. It's him (with a sad look)  :)) --TMCk (talk) 18:44, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

That's a relief. I was going to do a Google Photos link, but Google uses a URL shortener that Misplaced Pages apparently blocks. -- Scjessey (talk) 18:47, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

@TracyMcClark: Well... I'm bummed about being blocked. With that said, I can appreciate the humor of the situation as well as the inconvenience of it. -- Scjessey (talk) 18:49, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

I definitely can see your frustration in the pic. The little ordeal should be over shortly, tho. Cheers, --TMCk (talk) 18:54, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Seriously though. Misplaced Pages needs 2FA more than ever. -- Scjessey (talk) 18:49, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

• Unblocked. Hello there, Scjessey, welcome back. Me, I don't use 2FA (too inconvenient with all my socks, cough), but I have a strong-ass password. Bishonen | talk 18:56, 30 December 2016 (UTC).

• Bless you, Bishonen. Sorry for all the trouble everyone. -- Scjessey (talk) 18:57, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

• I can see it now. Was unblocking but Bish beat me to the button (she moves fast for a dinosaur!). I trust you have a strong password now? One that you don't use anywhere else (and FYI, MediaWiki supports absurdly long passwords)? Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:01, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

• Thank you, User:HJ Mitchell. My password is much stronger now. Fortunately, I never use the same password on different accounts. -- Scjessey (talk) 19:03, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

• Any idea how his happened then? Reuse of passwords between websites was thought to be the cause of the last incident like this. Might be worth an email to the WMF. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:09, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

• I have absolutely no idea. The only thing I can think of is that I've had the same password for years and never really given it much thought. I will change it on a regular basis from now on. And now I think of it, I have a global Wikimedia login setup. I'd better check to see if anything else has been messed with. -- Scjessey (talk) 19:18, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

FYI: A password manager like Lastpass can come in very handy to prevent password reuse. Twitbookspacetube (talk) 03:09, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

As I indicated earlier, password reuse wasn't the issue because I don't reuse passwords. The problem is more likely related to the fact I've not changed the password for many years and it wasn't nearly strong enough. I was just lazy about it. -- Scjessey (talk) 13:46, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

RfC Notice

There is a Request for Comment posted at Talk:New York Daily News#Request for Comment. You are being notified as one of every registered editor who has edited that article in that past year. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:58, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Donald Trump

Which comment? --Dervorguilla (talk) 23:02, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

@Dervorguilla: This comment. It added nothing whatsoever to the discussion except pissing other editors off. -- Scjessey (talk) 13:41, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

I have added a new Option C to the most recent survey at the Trump talk page. I think everyone will find it appealing, so please comment about it and we can be done with this. Thanks. Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:55, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Incompetence

You accuse me of sounding "incompetent." I cannot imagine anything more incompetent than referring to Trump's ascension to the presidency in future tense instead of past tense, and in the lead of an extremely high-profile BLP to boot. I am not going to offer you any concessions in order to get it changed to past sense. Your position is quite (shall we say?) untenable.Anythingyouwant (talk) 20:12, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

You failed to seek consensus and blundered forward anyway. And I said it makes Misplaced Pages seem incompetent, not you. -- Scjessey (talk) 14:32, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Barack Obama

I saw your edit on Donald Trump talk and 'the Trump family lie,' and that is exactly what is needed on Donald Trump. I left a message on the Barack Obama talk page asking editors there to come over to help. As I don't know any of them, and you do, if you know of any who might be interested, could you ping them and ask for their help? Too much is being excluded from this article, in my opinion, and editors experienced in a sitting president's BLP, especially of a recent one, and who managed to get that article to FA, are sorely needed there. Thanks. SW3 5DL (talk) 14:15, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Quick note

Hey Scjessey, regarding this revert, I thought I'd bring it here instead of directly to the talk page in hopes of avoiding a can-of-worms RfC that seems to be the norm there. Hopefully we can work out a compromise that will short-circuit that. My objections to your revert are, in order of importance:

1. The words "described his practice of" assume in Misplaced Pages's voice that it was an actual practice. We should just report what he said.
2. Using the Rolling Stone as a sole source: I always try to use a more middle-of-the-road source like WaPo, NYTimes, etc. It's not that the information is unreliable, but that it can look biased and invites people to counter with more "biased" sources.
3. My objection to the direct quote is based on MOS:QUOTE which says, "It is generally recommended that content be written in Misplaced Pages editors' own words. Using too many quotes is incompatible with an encyclopedic writing style...Consider minimizing the use of quotations by paraphrasing, as quotations should not replace free text (including one that the editor writes)."

Perhaps you would consider a partial self-revert that resolves some of these concerns ~Awilley (talk) 19:38, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

I see this is now being discussed on the article talk page, which was always the better venue. -- Scjessey (talk) 14:56, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

WP:BLP

You stated that there's more than enough citable material to document bigotry, sexism, xenophobia. Can you please cite specific examples to reliable sources? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 13:39, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

This question should be posed at the article talk page, not my user talk page. -- Scjessey (talk) 13:04, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

ThinkProgress

Hi. I notice that you previously had commented on the ThinkProgress article. Over the past few months, a lot of editing has been going on at the article, and now there is a disagreement on the Talk page about whether the current version of the article is balanced or not, as well as whether the content throughout the article is appropriate/optimal for the article. If you can spare some time to analyze the article and the current discussions on the talk page, I'm sure everyone would be interested in your input, either way. Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:32, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Apologies

Apologies for the unnecessary comment. I was reading the Star Trek Into Darkness page and found it really funny, and thought it would be funny if you were known for it.

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Scjessey. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Arbitration notice on Presidency of Donald Trump

Hello, you recently reverted my edit on this article. However, there is currently an arbitration notice in place stating "Consensus required: All editors must obtain consensus on the talk page of this article before reinstating any edits that have been challenged (via reversion). If in doubt, don't make the edit." I am now again removing the content. Please obtain consensus on the talk page before returning to article. Thank you. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia 21:28, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

El Cid, I believe recent discussion at Arbcom Enforcement has taken the view that your repeat edit is a violation of DS. Please consider. SPECIFICO talk 21:52, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

@El cid, el campeador: Er... you just violated the 1RR rule on Presidency of Donald Trump, not me. Maybe look to your own editing behavior before offering a critique of someone else's. -- Scjessey (talk) 22:37, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

December 2017

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the ] or ]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 19:06, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" ). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

@Coffee: Thank you for the absurdly aggressive enforcement detailed above, which was enacted more than 24 hours after the original edit took place, and which I did not interpret as a sanction violation anyway. I recognize that Arbitration Enforcement is a thankless job that few editors want to perform, and I thank you for stepping up to the plate and doing this important task, but I think even a cursory glance at my editing record would lead most people to think a knee-jerk block for a single edit I had made with a satisfactory explanatory edit summary was just a bit harsh. Anyway, I respect your authority and this will be my only complaint about the matter. -- Scjessey (talk) 14:13, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't request anyone respect authority, just the process; your cordiality and understanding, however, are noted and appreciated (not seen often while doing this). I prefer that blocks not be punitive, only preventative. If you can give me your word that you will not repeat such behavior, I will gladly lift the sanction. As is always my standard policy with first time offenses. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 16:56, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

@Coffee: In all honesty, I did not believe I had violated discretionary sanctions (I would never knowingly do so), but I concede that my interpretation may have been in error. I think the block has expired now anyway, but I thank you for the offer. -- Scjessey (talk) 19:19, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

A pie for you!

Thanks for your contributions to WP! Sorry for the whole Trump thing. Hopefully I did not come off in a bad light. I was not trying to be an ass or anything. As I said I don't think either of us did anything particularly reprehensible, but I still feel responsible for getting us both sacked. Hope this pie makes up for anything I did or failed to do. Cheers (and for the record I'm not a MAGA person, not that I would let it get in the way of NPOV if I was) ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia 16:45, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Civility Barnstar
		For being unbelievably civil in your response to a frustrating situation here in our community of volunteers (the irony of the beverage in this barnstar is not lost on me). 172.56.21.117 (talk) 21:01, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Are you serious?

Hi - I have reverted my correcting edit, as you insisted, so the citation is now incorrect. Is that really what you want? The title of the article uses the word 'illegal' but you want the title misquoted for the citation? Birtig (talk) 16:45, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

@Birtig: What I really want is for you to not violate discretionary sanctions. Whether or not the word is correct is irrelevant, because that will be discussed on the article's talk page and decided by consensus. The problem was your violation, which (if reported) would result in an immediate block. You must follow the guidelines to the letter when editing political articles. -- Scjessey (talk) 16:49, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough. My intention was never to break guidelines and, having read them first, I didn't believe I had in editing the citation rather than the text of the article itself. But we all learn. I will discuss on talk. Birtig (talk) 17:01, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

@Birtig: Excellent response. You are doing the right thing, even if it doesn't seem right at the moment. Collaborative effort is vital to the success of Misplaced Pages. -- Scjessey (talk) 17:09, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

March 2018

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Template:Z33

Please self-revert this. I'm willing to keep discussing the matter. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 07:53, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Is that what you meant to do?

Hi, Scjessey. I don't understand why you left a templated message about Mike Hocks Hucker's username here, complaining about his username and also complaining about the fact that you hadn't told him what was wrong with it, and inviting MHH to ask you for clarification on your page. Is that what you meant to do? Please don't confuse the newbies. Bishonen | talk 16:17, 15 March 2018 (UTC).

@Bishonen: Sorry if I didn't get the procedure right, but it is the first time I have run into a situation where querying a username seemed warranted. That said, I would think the problem is obvious. "Mike Hocks Hucker" is clearly meant to be a jokey variant of cocksucker. -- Scjessey (talk) 21:00, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Man, you have a vivid imagination. But whether or not, I see you've gone back and made your post clearer. Thank you. Bishonen | talk 21:58, 15 March 2018 (UTC).

Please stop with the snarky

I'm not a "dude", and I don't appreciate your snarkiness and inuendos that I'm not neutral, so please stop. There is a civility sanction on that TP - honor it. 16:01, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

@Atsme: I use the term "dude" for any gender. Sorry if you are offended. I'm not suggesting you aren't neutral. I know you aren't neutral. Your attempts to downplay Trump's inadequacies and inflate Obama's are transparently non-neutral. -- Scjessey (talk) 12:27, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't get offended that easily but I do get annoyed by disruptive behavior. You know nothing about me, my neutrality and obviously have no clue as to my motivations. Please do yourself a favor and . You, on the other hand, have chosen to publish your political & religious beliefs and biases on your user page so I'll share a bit of friendly advice - stop falsely accusing others of not being neutral; rather, take a look at your own user page to see where lack of neutrality may actually originate. Happy editing. 17:42, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

@Atsme: I make my biases known on my user page but don't act on them in my editing. I am scrupulously neutral. You can't seem to do that. That comment of yours about Trump and Obama was so painfully non-neutral, it is clear you cannot do the same. Now it is time for you to stay away from my talk page. -- Scjessey (talk) 20:57, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

I came here to advise you to stop the snarkiness and PAs against me. I've completed that necessary task, so there's no need for you to be concerned about me coming back here again. I make it a point to steer clear of editors I consider mean-spirited and/or disingenuous as what your comments have indicated to me. 21:09, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm going to pile on here, because this needs to be said. Atsme, Scjessey is right. You claim to be neutral, but you're not. Your constant snarkiness about Obama and Hillary, and defenses of Trump and denigration of the Mueller investigation and conclusions of the intelligence community are noticed. Don't try to deny that such is your bias. That's your opinion, and you have a right to it. Don't be ashamed of it by trying to claim it's a neutral POV. It's not. It goes against RS, largely because you must imbibe unreliable sources. Some of your statements and views are only found there. That causes problems at Misplaced Pages.

Scjessey, OTOH, like myself, make our views known and don't claim to be neutral, but we try to keep that from affecting our editing. Can you see the difference?

Our thinking is informed by RS, not fringe sources. That means we largely agree with the Trump and Russia affair articles, and you don't. Our biases are informed by very different sources. It really can't be any other way. Outside of Misplaced Pages, it would be something we could just ignore, but here your attitude (civil as it is), comments, and tendencies, are often not-so-subtle attempts to undermine content based on RS because they are at odds with your non-RS informed POV.

I don't know how to fix this, because no one can, or wants to, force you to change your mind. That's something only you can do. Progressives find it easier to change their minds, because progress involves leaving old ideas and adopting new, IOW a scientific mindset. They follow the evidence found in RS. Conservatives find this harder, because they are busy defending the status quo. With Trump's followers, things aren't black/white, because he is neither conservative or liberal. He's a blend, but his politics are populist and manipulative, really like quicksand. They are followers of a man who lies and manipulates constantly, and RS show he's being help in those efforts by Russians, with the purpose of cause division and weakening democracy.

The only solution I can see is if you'll stop viewing fringe sources. Turn Fox News off completely. Don't access conservative websites or read FB posts from them.

Subscribe to RS. That's where the real evidence is found. On FB that's easy. I get all major RS headlines by email, FB, and Twitter. My twitter feed is very informative in this regard, because I post a lot, nearly all from mainstream RS, with an occasional slightly fringe post because of the POV, not necessarily for every detail. (I'd never use them here.)

MelanieN and myself pointed out how you've got this backwards. Evidence/RS tell the real story, unlike conspiracy theories from unreliable sources. Take a look at my Reliable sources stash. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 01:16, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Survey Invite

I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take no more than 1-2 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at https://meta.wikimedia.org/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.

Survey Link: http://uchicago.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9S3JByWf57fXEkR?Q_DL=56np5HpEZWkMlr7_9S3JByWf57fXEkR_MLRP_5jq1HAz4E0HDAHP&Q_CHL=gl

I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Misplaced Pages that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.

Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 22:21, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

@Porteclefs: I'd be happy to, but when I clicked the link it said "You have either already completed the survey or your session has expired." -- Scjessey (talk) 15:03, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Arbitration Enforcement

I've opened an Arbitration Enforcement request involving you at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Scjessey. -- Netoholic @ 18:54, 16 April 2018 (UTC)